Just What We Need... More Blog Search That's Not Very Good
from the this-is-progress? dept
A few weeks after Google finally got around to offering blog search, along comes Yahoo to do the same -- and now we know why the two search giants have taken so long: neither of them is very good. They're not bad exactly, but they're nothing special. None of them are particularly comprehensive, and all of them have problems, which means that people end up giving up on blog search completely. You either get a lot of useless junk or you have to use about five different ones to get all the results you want (or, more likely you get both: the junk and multiple searches needed). That doesn't help anyone. It just makes the information overload problem worse.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
At least Google was first...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Juiciness
http://choxets.blog8.fc2.com/blog-entry-442.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Search pattern languages
More to the point, there is still a dramatic difference between the number of people posting articles about a given topic, versus the proportion of people searching. For example, I wrote an article about the recent partial solar eclipse, tagged it `eclipse' in technorati; for a couple of hours, my post was top of the search pile for that tag. Over the course of the subsequent 5 days, 109 separate impressions have been made on the photo-gallery in question, of which 1 has come from someone following technorati; the rest was word of mouth, friends & cow-orkers of friends spreading the word. I deduce that people simply are not using technorati tags for searching, and of course the delay in getting google to index your site is prohibitive when it comes to getting highly placed for rapid-changing events.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
But why?
But I wonder why anyone would want to search for what some random stranger says. I have always been free to listen to the rantings of anyone that I meet, but I find that I don't usually want to.
And by searching for their blogs, I know even less about them than if I actually met them.....and I might end up reading something from an idiot like Dorpus!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Great work
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Good site
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: At least Google was first...
[ link to this | view in thread ]